Do you?
Tell me why you believe. Or, conversely, why you choose to disbelieve.
I'm not starting this thread to fertilize a battleground. Spirituality is an intimate experience. It is not concerned with empirical logic beyond what works for the individual. To that end, I'm not looking to debate.
Only to share.
So, tell me: What do you believe?
Edit: Just to be clear, the intent of this thread is to allow folks to weigh in on their personal spiritual ideology; it's not an opportunity for religious debate. There are countless other threads available in which that is a possibility.
You can have personal tastes that doesn't interfere with the personal preferences of others. Whether you prefer beef over pork, indie over heavy, green over blue, introversion over extraversion etc., personal preferences can coexist without contradiction as to what is real and not.
But it doesn't make sense to call a religious belief "personal" since it is by definition cosmological and universal in scope. To believe in any religious worldview is to believe it exists outside yourself, that it is true for everybody, no matter what they may believe themselves.
To spell it out: You don't believe you alone will get reincarnated while other's won't. You can't believe that some astrological 'star-influence' only hit you at birth, but failed to influence the un-believers. And the moral one: Do any Catholics think that only Catholic gays will spend their afterlife tortured in hell while homosexual Zeus-believers will be spared? Etc. ad nauseam.
Thus every religious belief will per definition claim validity for everybody - explicitly or implicitly dependent on what they can best get away in the context.
Claims of religious faith are 'strong claims' because either they are valid
independant of personal taste or they are invalid. So are claims of gravitational laws. While there is nothing wrong with strong claims as such, they will of course need to be backed by equally strong reasons to be granted status as anything more than personal fantasies.
Religious attempts at defining our shared world must be challenged, it must be held responsible for internal inconsistencies and external counterevidence. Because they are invariably speaking about the life and the world of everybody, religious ideas can't be allowed to hide behind the protection of 'personal taste', that we provide personal sexual or gastronomic preferences. Actually this protection express the strong claim that who people screw and what eat is their personal judgment alone, provided the don't hinder others' ability to judge these matters for themselves. Which religious morality invariably does.
I believe gravitational laws are true about the world. Not because of a personal taste, but because of strong arguments, strong evidence and strong theoretical consistency. This opens the peossibility that an even stronger theory might come up in the future, which would force me to change belief. To say "Personally I believe in gravitation" would be just as non-sensical as saying "I believe in a God that only exists for me until I change my taste tomorrow."
To accept double standards when socially forming ideas on what our world is all about would be to give in to powerplays and injustice. Religious belief should not be given a free ride, but be subjected to critique and rejection, just like every other strong and influential claim about impersonal, shared conditions - be it scientific, political, ethical, historical, technical, psychological etc.
This 'personal faith' stuff is just an excuse for religions not to face the music of criticism and responsibility.